The client's own team had already negotiated a 32% reduction. A second, credible option pushed it to 45%.
45%
Final rate reduction, up from a 32% best and final
$623K
Total annual savings at the final rate
$1.87M
Total savings across the 3-year term
The situation
An IoT connectivity provider's device fleet ran on carrier SIM connectivity, close to $1.38 million a year. Ahead of renewal, the client's own team, led by their VP of Supply Chain and Operations, ran the negotiation directly and got the incumbent carrier down 32%, a strong result they earned through real work. The carrier called it their best and final offer, and results like that get reported up through finance leadership as a win. This one was.
Why this was still worth a second look
A negotiated result is only as good as the leverage available at the time. Without a second, credible option in hand, there's no way to know whether 32% reflects the true ceiling or just the outer edge of what was possible with one vendor in the room. That's not a knock on the client's team, it's the natural limit of negotiating with a single counterparty, however well it's done.
What Resourcive brought
Resourcive was brought in specifically to test whether the number the client's team had already secured could go further. Rather than reopening the negotiation from scratch, the approach was to bring a real alternative into the picture: a competing proposal from a vendor with a stronger technology platform.
That gave the incumbent carrier a genuine reason to move again, not because anything was wrong with the 32% they'd offered, but because a credible second option changes what "final" actually means. The competing proposal did more than create pricing pressure: it gave the client a credible reason to bring a second vendor into its mix going forward, trading a single-carrier renewal for a two-vendor structure with better technology optionality and less single-source risk.
"This contract is one of our largest operating expenses. Resourcive took an already competitive offer and negotiated our costs 45% below our previous agreement, delivering meaningful savings. They know the technology market inside and out, handled the negotiations, and even introduced us to alternative carriers worth considering in the future."
Chief Financial Officer
Results
Documented outcomes
- The carrier's rate moved from 32% to 45%.
- $623K in total annual savings at the new rate.
- $189K in additional annual savings directly attributable to the added leverage, the difference between the 32% already secured and the 45% final rate.
- $1.87M in total savingsacross the three-year contract term.
- Zero implementation work or technology disruption; existing devices and service stayed exactly as they were.
- A two-vendor structure now in place for future leverage.
